![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hang tight on evaluating the plot section for a little while. Another user's made a lot of changes recently, such as apparently creating Characters and Setting subsections, and I need to wait until we can work out a solution and the article stabilizes. Tezero ( talk) 19:42, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Running Man Barnstar | |
Thank you for all you have done to help me with the Boat Race articles. Tonight we hit a landmark, over 50% of the race articles are now Good or Featured Articles, which is a monumental achievement considering that none of the articles even existed eight months ago. Thanks again. The Rambling Man ( talk) 21:34, 3 January 2015 (UTC) |
Just a note: I'm rewriting the Reception section in one of my tempspaces, so don't concern yourself with that right now. Should finish before day's end. Tezero ( talk) 16:43, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey, do you think you could take a look at Freedom Planet's current FAC? Not much has changed since the last one (though obviously feel free to speak up if you see anything wrong), but you supported then and I could always use another vote. Tezero ( talk) 17:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
So I just rewrote the Gameplay section of Sonic & Knuckles. You seemed keen to tackle Development for the last one, so maybe you can continue that here; shouldn't be too much different. Tezero ( talk) 20:07, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This may sound shocking, but I'm thinking of taking a break from Sonic articles before too long, and with that, likely Wikipedia altogether. I'll return eventually, maybe in a few months (I still need to get Sonic '06 to FA, and the Archie comics up to at least GA after getting current with them, so I can't disappear completely), but there are some other RL things I'd like to take care of in the meantime. Looking ahead to until then, though, would you mind reviewing Sonic 1's FAC here? We can also plow through 3D Blast to finish off the main Genesis games, and maybe Adventure 1 or Heroes or something if you want, or I can help with one of your projects since I grew up with a lot of that as well. Tezero ( talk) 22:46, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
I've done an awful lot of GA reviews recently, but the sheer volume and determination you have put in just leaves me seriously impressed. Keep it up and you'll win the GA cup, but more importantly clear the backlog of articles that people want to see at a higher quality. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:23, 5 January 2015 (UTC) |
Hey bro. Would you be interested in reviewing this
Rajinikanth film?
—
Ssven2
speak 2 me
05:39, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Lyndhurst, Hampshire you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ritchie333 --
Ritchie333 (
talk)
16:20, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Lyndhurst, Hampshire you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Lyndhurst, Hampshire for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ritchie333 --
Ritchie333 (
talk)
19:41, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, any chance you can review this one?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:39, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Ipigott's addressed them all I believe. Thanks for looking at it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:03, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jaguar. Feel like exchanging reviews? I'll review one or both (preference both) of your GA nominations and you can review any one or two of the five video-game related articles I have nominated. Also just throwing it out there, you can get ahead of me if you like; if you review more than two just notify me when you nominate something else and i'll review it in exchange when the time comes. And while i'm begging, I do happen to have a video-game inspired film currently nominated for FAC if that subject interests you; i'm happy to exchange pretty much anything for comments on that. Oh and just so you know, I pretty much wrote the entire FAC article, but the five GA nominations I just cleaned up and adopted; they were mainly written by somebody else. Don't feel obligated to exchange any of these, just thought you might be interested. Have a nice day. Freikorp ( talk) 12:22, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Wipeout 2097 you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
00:20, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Wipeout 2097 you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Wipeout 2097 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
01:40, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Jungle Strike you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
02:01, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Jungle Strike you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Jungle Strike for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
02:40, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Requesting feedback at PEER Review. MaRAno FAN 14:30, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Jungle Strike you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Jungle Strike for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
23:22, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, any chance you could review this one?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:06, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm afraid that your submissions of both Jungle Strike and Wipeout 2097 fall foul of the requirement that "significant work" must be contributed during one of the rounds of the current cup. Although there's no doubt that you did do significant work overall on those articles, the work that was done in 2015 on both articles were in response to the Good Article reviews. We appreciate your work on these articles, but they won't count against your round one score - but based on the Good Article reviews that you've been conducting, I think it's pretty safe to say that you're through to round 2 already. By the way - big fan of Jungle Strike, I vividly remember that first level where you save the President even though I haven't played it for like 20 years. Miyagawa ( talk) 18:40, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello Jaguar. I saw that you took on the review for Rocket (Beyoncé song) and wrote in your final comment that you would quick pass it if it was renominated. I've just addressed your comments and wanted to notify you that I am nominating it again now. I Am... ***D.D. 12:59, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() GA Cup competitors and observers: Get ready, we're about to move into the finals of the inaugural GA Cup! Not nearly as important as another competition taking place this weekend, but significant none the less. No deflated footballs here, though! Thursday saw the end of Round 4. Out of the 8 contestants in the semi-finals, 5 have moved to the finals. The semi-finals continued to be very competitive. The highest scorer overall was Ritchie333 from Pool B, with an impressive 488 points and a total of 36 articles reviewed, the most of any competitor; close behind was Jaguar (last round's wildcard), with 477 points and 29 reviews. At times, the competition between them was a real horse-race, and exciting for the judges to witness. Both Ritchie333 and Jaguar have moved onto the finals. In Pool A, Good888 with 294 points, and Wizardman with 179 also won slots in the final. 3family6 with 285 points, won the wildcard slot. We also had one withdrawal, due to outside-of-Wikipedia priorities. Congrats to all! Although there were just 8 competitors, more reviews were conducted this round than in any other round—148, which demonstrates the commitment and enthusiasm of our participants. The most successful competitors, like in all previous rounds, reviewed articles that languished in the queue at GAC for at least five months (worth 18 points). The Boat Race articles were popular review choices again, with almost 20% of the articles reviewed this month. In other news, we received another report from GA statistics page maintainer User:AmericanLemming. See here [1] for his take on the effect the GA Cup has had on Good Article reviews. He believes that we've made a real difference. AmericanLemming says: "As you can see, ...the GA Cup has done wonders when it comes to getting the oldest nominations reviewed much sooner thanks to the system whereby you get the most points for reviewing the oldest articles." Everyone involved with this competition, especially the competitors, should be very proud of what we've been able to accomplish! The Final will start on February 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on February 26 at 23:59:59 UTC with a winner being crowned. Information about the Final can be found here. Good luck to all our finalists! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to
our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jaguar, would you mind reviewing Deepak Tijori, an Indian supporting actor and director. Its a small article. Thanks.-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 14:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, can you find some more content and a source for this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:47, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that! Nope, just filling in a final red link of Bramshill House which I've recently nommed for FAC. Providing the colonel is kept locked up at some point we might open a peer review for Bentworth. Still would be good at some point to get Alton up to GA of course.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:50, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for putting the template on Bertha Swirles/page metrics. I would be grateful if you could explain why you did so? Leutha ( talk) 00:58, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Andrew Ryan (BioShock) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
1916Walker987 --
1916Walker987 (
talk)
17:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Sonic & Knuckles you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
J Milburn --
J Milburn (
talk)
18:40, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Since you claim to be a "90s kid" (despite being born in 1996, haha), could you perhaps help me with the articles related to the Cartoon Cartoons? I took out the cruftwhacker on some of them, but they still need work if they're going to be GAs.-- Phil A. Fry ( talk) 00:27, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() Greetings, all! 4 months ago the GA Cup began and now as it comes to a close, it's time to start thinking about the next competition! Below is a link to a Google Form with several questions. We want to here from you what you thought about the GA Cup. Just over half of the questions are required while the others are optional. If you don't want to answer one of the optional questions, feel free to skip it. Your responses will only be visible to the three judges. Thank-you to all particpants for making the first GA Cup a success and we hope to see you all come out again for the next competition! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to
our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Would you like to conduct a GA Review on
Naayak? Please let me know if you are interested.
Pavanjandhyala (
talk)
03:05, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I have replied to the suggestions you placed at the GAR page except for one as i could not find references for the cast section except for two. Suggest an alternative for this.
Pavanjandhyala (
talk)
03:09, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello! You don't know me, but I've noticed your fine contributions to GAN, and I was wondering if you would be interested in reviewing one or both of the articles I've nomed: Irataba and Rose-Baley Party. I'm pretty sure they both meet the GAC, but I can't seem to find anyone interested in taking a look at the material. Rationalobserver ( talk) 22:50, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
The article
Sonic & Knuckles you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Sonic & Knuckles for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
J Milburn --
J Milburn (
talk)
19:41, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
It has been renominated again. Hawaiifive0 ( talk) 13:43, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
I cannot believe you closed the review without even a holding period whilst I was blocked. I could've easily addressed your concerns in a day, at most. Please reopen the review so that I can actually respond. I waited nearly five months in the queue for this. What's more, many of your concerns seem to be misunderstandings. Everything you said was "unsourced" has citations with page numbers. I think you must've misconstrued the citation style. What's more, the name of the organisation is "Association of Ukrainians in Great Britain". Do you want me to change their name for them? "Great Britain" is commonly used in British usage when referring to things that do not include Ireland (i.e. Northern Ireland). Did you check the citation? This could've been easily verified by doing so. Please reopen the review. RGloucester — ☎ 18:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for getting to the Giant Bomb page, I'll go over your comments and make appropriate changes tomorrow.-- FLStyle ( talk) 20:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
First of all, thank you very much for taking the time to review the article. I've been waiting for a while and it's satisfying to get some feedback. I've attempted to fix all the issues you found with it. I had already linked SSX Tricky in the Development section, so I did not need to add another link where you pointed to. Again, thanks a bunch for helping. BlookerG talk 00:58, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The GA Cup |
Congratulations! You are the winner of the 2014-2015 GA Cup! Thank-you for being part of the success and we hope to see you next year!-- Dom497 ( talk) 15:41, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
Congratulations, Jaguar! This is a well-deserved acknowledgment! Rationalobserver ( talk) 16:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() The inaugural GA Cup is now over! The competition officially ended Thursday. Congrats to everyone who participated, and especially to our finalists. The winner of the 2014/2015 GA Cup is Jaguar! He earned an impressive 615 points, despite only being a wildcard in the Round 4. The key to Jaguar's success seemed to be reviewing lots of articles as well as reviewer the oldest nominations; he reviewed 39 nominations in this round. Overall, the key to everyone's success was reviewing articles that had been in the queue for at least three months, which was true throughout the competition. In second place was Wizardman, with 241 points, and following close behind in third place was Good888, with 211 points. Congrats! Although there were a couple of bumps along the way, the judges have thoroughly enjoyed managing this competition. We hope that the participants had fun as well. The GA Cup was a resounding success, and that's due to all of you. The judges sincerely thank each and every participant, and for the editors who were willing to subject their articles to this process. We learned a lot. For example, we learned that even with meticulous planning, it's impossible to anticipate every problem. We learned that the scoring system we set up wasn't always the most effective. The enthusiasm and motivation of Wikipedians is awesome, and we enjoyed watching what was sometimes fierce competition. We look forward to the second GA Cup later this year. We reached many of our goals. See here for GA Cup statistics. We made a big difference, especially in shortening the length of time articles spend in the queue, and in reducing the backlog. Overall, 578 nominations were reviewed throughout the competition and a total of 8,184 points were awarded. Everyone involved should be very proud of what we've accomplished through the GA Cup. Stay tuned for more information about our next competition. There will be some much-needed changes made in the scoring system next time. We appreciate your feedback, and commit to seriously consider it. If you haven't already, please fill out the feedback form here. If you're interested in being a judge in our second GA Cup, please let one of our judges know or click on the tab found in the feedback form. Again, thanks to all and congratulations to our winners! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. |
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:17, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader
Freikorp (
submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a
Featured Article on the 2001 film
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as
Godot13 (
submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge,
Sturmvogel_66 (
submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.
In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:
You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email)
Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.
( Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
In a particular film, except for the female leads, none of the other characters have names. If, as a part of a GAR, the reviewer asks to cite the characters' names, what to do? Pavanjandhyala ( talk) 03:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You might have seen my comments about the ethnic groups section of the United Kingdom article. I'm willing to help improve that section, and am happy to give you advice on it (I know the sources quite well) if required. I know it's only a small part of the article, but the section as it stands, stands in the way of GA status as far as I see it. Cordless Larry ( talk) 17:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Would you like to conduct a thorough c/e on this article? Let me know if you are interested in doing so.
Pavanjandhyala (
talk)
14:59, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
@ Pavanjandhyala: I've given most of the article a copyedit and cleanup, though I may come back to the rest later, but I think that's all of the major issues out of the way. Unfortunately I couldn't work out on what the first half of the plot meant because I haven't watched the film and didn't understand what was happening, so I apologise if the first sentence still looks unclear! Do you plan on nominating this for GA soon? There are some overlinking in the lead and also half of the non-essential cast can be taken out. I will probably get back to cleaning everything soon, please let me know what you think? ☯ Jag uar ☯ 15:17, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
You still planning to help me with articles relating to Cartoon Cartoons? It's been a while since you responded.-- Phil A. Fry ( talk) 18:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Jaguar! I'm not sure if you usually get involved with peer reviews, but your GA review of Irataba was very helpful, so I wanted to invite you to comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Irataba/archive1. No worries if you're too busy or disinterested; I'll understand. Rationalobserver ( talk) 21:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jaguar,
Thank you again for taking on the Mind Meld good article nomination. I have submitted the article for featured status here. If you would be willing to contribute to the discussion, I would be grateful for any further constructive comments you might provide.
Neelix ( talk) 23:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyeditor's Barnstar |
For conducting a c/e on Mayabazar, making my job easy to go through its GA Review. Thank you! Pavanjandhyala ( talk) 01:46, 13 March 2015 (UTC) |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Hang tight on evaluating the plot section for a little while. Another user's made a lot of changes recently, such as apparently creating Characters and Setting subsections, and I need to wait until we can work out a solution and the article stabilizes. Tezero ( talk) 19:42, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Running Man Barnstar | |
Thank you for all you have done to help me with the Boat Race articles. Tonight we hit a landmark, over 50% of the race articles are now Good or Featured Articles, which is a monumental achievement considering that none of the articles even existed eight months ago. Thanks again. The Rambling Man ( talk) 21:34, 3 January 2015 (UTC) |
Just a note: I'm rewriting the Reception section in one of my tempspaces, so don't concern yourself with that right now. Should finish before day's end. Tezero ( talk) 16:43, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey, do you think you could take a look at Freedom Planet's current FAC? Not much has changed since the last one (though obviously feel free to speak up if you see anything wrong), but you supported then and I could always use another vote. Tezero ( talk) 17:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
So I just rewrote the Gameplay section of Sonic & Knuckles. You seemed keen to tackle Development for the last one, so maybe you can continue that here; shouldn't be too much different. Tezero ( talk) 20:07, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
This may sound shocking, but I'm thinking of taking a break from Sonic articles before too long, and with that, likely Wikipedia altogether. I'll return eventually, maybe in a few months (I still need to get Sonic '06 to FA, and the Archie comics up to at least GA after getting current with them, so I can't disappear completely), but there are some other RL things I'd like to take care of in the meantime. Looking ahead to until then, though, would you mind reviewing Sonic 1's FAC here? We can also plow through 3D Blast to finish off the main Genesis games, and maybe Adventure 1 or Heroes or something if you want, or I can help with one of your projects since I grew up with a lot of that as well. Tezero ( talk) 22:46, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
I've done an awful lot of GA reviews recently, but the sheer volume and determination you have put in just leaves me seriously impressed. Keep it up and you'll win the GA cup, but more importantly clear the backlog of articles that people want to see at a higher quality. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 21:23, 5 January 2015 (UTC) |
Hey bro. Would you be interested in reviewing this
Rajinikanth film?
—
Ssven2
speak 2 me
05:39, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Lyndhurst, Hampshire you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ritchie333 --
Ritchie333 (
talk)
16:20, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Lyndhurst, Hampshire you nominated as a
good article has failed
; see
Talk:Lyndhurst, Hampshire for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Ritchie333 --
Ritchie333 (
talk)
19:41, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, any chance you can review this one?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:39, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Ipigott's addressed them all I believe. Thanks for looking at it!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:03, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jaguar. Feel like exchanging reviews? I'll review one or both (preference both) of your GA nominations and you can review any one or two of the five video-game related articles I have nominated. Also just throwing it out there, you can get ahead of me if you like; if you review more than two just notify me when you nominate something else and i'll review it in exchange when the time comes. And while i'm begging, I do happen to have a video-game inspired film currently nominated for FAC if that subject interests you; i'm happy to exchange pretty much anything for comments on that. Oh and just so you know, I pretty much wrote the entire FAC article, but the five GA nominations I just cleaned up and adopted; they were mainly written by somebody else. Don't feel obligated to exchange any of these, just thought you might be interested. Have a nice day. Freikorp ( talk) 12:22, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Wipeout 2097 you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
00:20, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Wipeout 2097 you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Wipeout 2097 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
01:40, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Jungle Strike you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
02:01, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Jungle Strike you nominated as a
good article has been placed on hold
. The article is close to meeting the
good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See
Talk:Jungle Strike for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
02:40, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Requesting feedback at PEER Review. MaRAno FAN 14:30, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
The article
Jungle Strike you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Jungle Strike for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Freikorp --
Freikorp (
talk)
23:22, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, any chance you could review this one?♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:06, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm afraid that your submissions of both Jungle Strike and Wipeout 2097 fall foul of the requirement that "significant work" must be contributed during one of the rounds of the current cup. Although there's no doubt that you did do significant work overall on those articles, the work that was done in 2015 on both articles were in response to the Good Article reviews. We appreciate your work on these articles, but they won't count against your round one score - but based on the Good Article reviews that you've been conducting, I think it's pretty safe to say that you're through to round 2 already. By the way - big fan of Jungle Strike, I vividly remember that first level where you save the President even though I haven't played it for like 20 years. Miyagawa ( talk) 18:40, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello Jaguar. I saw that you took on the review for Rocket (Beyoncé song) and wrote in your final comment that you would quick pass it if it was renominated. I've just addressed your comments and wanted to notify you that I am nominating it again now. I Am... ***D.D. 12:59, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
![]() GA Cup competitors and observers: Get ready, we're about to move into the finals of the inaugural GA Cup! Not nearly as important as another competition taking place this weekend, but significant none the less. No deflated footballs here, though! Thursday saw the end of Round 4. Out of the 8 contestants in the semi-finals, 5 have moved to the finals. The semi-finals continued to be very competitive. The highest scorer overall was Ritchie333 from Pool B, with an impressive 488 points and a total of 36 articles reviewed, the most of any competitor; close behind was Jaguar (last round's wildcard), with 477 points and 29 reviews. At times, the competition between them was a real horse-race, and exciting for the judges to witness. Both Ritchie333 and Jaguar have moved onto the finals. In Pool A, Good888 with 294 points, and Wizardman with 179 also won slots in the final. 3family6 with 285 points, won the wildcard slot. We also had one withdrawal, due to outside-of-Wikipedia priorities. Congrats to all! Although there were just 8 competitors, more reviews were conducted this round than in any other round—148, which demonstrates the commitment and enthusiasm of our participants. The most successful competitors, like in all previous rounds, reviewed articles that languished in the queue at GAC for at least five months (worth 18 points). The Boat Race articles were popular review choices again, with almost 20% of the articles reviewed this month. In other news, we received another report from GA statistics page maintainer User:AmericanLemming. See here [1] for his take on the effect the GA Cup has had on Good Article reviews. He believes that we've made a real difference. AmericanLemming says: "As you can see, ...the GA Cup has done wonders when it comes to getting the oldest nominations reviewed much sooner thanks to the system whereby you get the most points for reviewing the oldest articles." Everyone involved with this competition, especially the competitors, should be very proud of what we've been able to accomplish! The Final will start on February 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on February 26 at 23:59:59 UTC with a winner being crowned. Information about the Final can be found here. Good luck to all our finalists! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to
our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jaguar, would you mind reviewing Deepak Tijori, an Indian supporting actor and director. Its a small article. Thanks.-- Skr15081997 ( talk) 14:09, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi, can you find some more content and a source for this?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:47, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for that! Nope, just filling in a final red link of Bramshill House which I've recently nommed for FAC. Providing the colonel is kept locked up at some point we might open a peer review for Bentworth. Still would be good at some point to get Alton up to GA of course.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:50, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for putting the template on Bertha Swirles/page metrics. I would be grateful if you could explain why you did so? Leutha ( talk) 00:58, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Andrew Ryan (BioShock) you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
1916Walker987 --
1916Walker987 (
talk)
17:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Sonic & Knuckles you nominated for
GA-status according to the
criteria.
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
J Milburn --
J Milburn (
talk)
18:40, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Since you claim to be a "90s kid" (despite being born in 1996, haha), could you perhaps help me with the articles related to the Cartoon Cartoons? I took out the cruftwhacker on some of them, but they still need work if they're going to be GAs.-- Phil A. Fry ( talk) 00:27, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() Greetings, all! 4 months ago the GA Cup began and now as it comes to a close, it's time to start thinking about the next competition! Below is a link to a Google Form with several questions. We want to here from you what you thought about the GA Cup. Just over half of the questions are required while the others are optional. If you don't want to answer one of the optional questions, feel free to skip it. Your responses will only be visible to the three judges. Thank-you to all particpants for making the first GA Cup a success and we hope to see you all come out again for the next competition! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to
our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Would you like to conduct a GA Review on
Naayak? Please let me know if you are interested.
Pavanjandhyala (
talk)
03:05, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
I have replied to the suggestions you placed at the GAR page except for one as i could not find references for the cast section except for two. Suggest an alternative for this.
Pavanjandhyala (
talk)
03:09, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello! You don't know me, but I've noticed your fine contributions to GAN, and I was wondering if you would be interested in reviewing one or both of the articles I've nomed: Irataba and Rose-Baley Party. I'm pretty sure they both meet the GAC, but I can't seem to find anyone interested in taking a look at the material. Rationalobserver ( talk) 22:50, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
The article
Sonic & Knuckles you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Sonic & Knuckles for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can
nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
J Milburn --
J Milburn (
talk)
19:41, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
It has been renominated again. Hawaiifive0 ( talk) 13:43, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
I cannot believe you closed the review without even a holding period whilst I was blocked. I could've easily addressed your concerns in a day, at most. Please reopen the review so that I can actually respond. I waited nearly five months in the queue for this. What's more, many of your concerns seem to be misunderstandings. Everything you said was "unsourced" has citations with page numbers. I think you must've misconstrued the citation style. What's more, the name of the organisation is "Association of Ukrainians in Great Britain". Do you want me to change their name for them? "Great Britain" is commonly used in British usage when referring to things that do not include Ireland (i.e. Northern Ireland). Did you check the citation? This could've been easily verified by doing so. Please reopen the review. RGloucester — ☎ 18:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for getting to the Giant Bomb page, I'll go over your comments and make appropriate changes tomorrow.-- FLStyle ( talk) 20:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
First of all, thank you very much for taking the time to review the article. I've been waiting for a while and it's satisfying to get some feedback. I've attempted to fix all the issues you found with it. I had already linked SSX Tricky in the Development section, so I did not need to add another link where you pointed to. Again, thanks a bunch for helping. BlookerG talk 00:58, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The GA Cup |
Congratulations! You are the winner of the 2014-2015 GA Cup! Thank-you for being part of the success and we hope to see you next year!-- Dom497 ( talk) 15:41, 28 February 2015 (UTC) |
Congratulations, Jaguar! This is a well-deserved acknowledgment! Rationalobserver ( talk) 16:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() The inaugural GA Cup is now over! The competition officially ended Thursday. Congrats to everyone who participated, and especially to our finalists. The winner of the 2014/2015 GA Cup is Jaguar! He earned an impressive 615 points, despite only being a wildcard in the Round 4. The key to Jaguar's success seemed to be reviewing lots of articles as well as reviewer the oldest nominations; he reviewed 39 nominations in this round. Overall, the key to everyone's success was reviewing articles that had been in the queue for at least three months, which was true throughout the competition. In second place was Wizardman, with 241 points, and following close behind in third place was Good888, with 211 points. Congrats! Although there were a couple of bumps along the way, the judges have thoroughly enjoyed managing this competition. We hope that the participants had fun as well. The GA Cup was a resounding success, and that's due to all of you. The judges sincerely thank each and every participant, and for the editors who were willing to subject their articles to this process. We learned a lot. For example, we learned that even with meticulous planning, it's impossible to anticipate every problem. We learned that the scoring system we set up wasn't always the most effective. The enthusiasm and motivation of Wikipedians is awesome, and we enjoyed watching what was sometimes fierce competition. We look forward to the second GA Cup later this year. We reached many of our goals. See here for GA Cup statistics. We made a big difference, especially in shortening the length of time articles spend in the queue, and in reducing the backlog. Overall, 578 nominations were reviewed throughout the competition and a total of 8,184 points were awarded. Everyone involved should be very proud of what we've accomplished through the GA Cup. Stay tuned for more information about our next competition. There will be some much-needed changes made in the scoring system next time. We appreciate your feedback, and commit to seriously consider it. If you haven't already, please fill out the feedback form here. If you're interested in being a judge in our second GA Cup, please let one of our judges know or click on the tab found in the feedback form. Again, thanks to all and congratulations to our winners! Cheers from Dom497, TheQ Editor and Figureskatingfan. |
-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:17, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader
Freikorp (
submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a
Featured Article on the 2001 film
Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as
Godot13 (
submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge,
Sturmvogel_66 (
submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.
In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:
You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email)
Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.
( Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
In a particular film, except for the female leads, none of the other characters have names. If, as a part of a GAR, the reviewer asks to cite the characters' names, what to do? Pavanjandhyala ( talk) 03:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. You might have seen my comments about the ethnic groups section of the United Kingdom article. I'm willing to help improve that section, and am happy to give you advice on it (I know the sources quite well) if required. I know it's only a small part of the article, but the section as it stands, stands in the way of GA status as far as I see it. Cordless Larry ( talk) 17:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Would you like to conduct a thorough c/e on this article? Let me know if you are interested in doing so.
Pavanjandhyala (
talk)
14:59, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
@ Pavanjandhyala: I've given most of the article a copyedit and cleanup, though I may come back to the rest later, but I think that's all of the major issues out of the way. Unfortunately I couldn't work out on what the first half of the plot meant because I haven't watched the film and didn't understand what was happening, so I apologise if the first sentence still looks unclear! Do you plan on nominating this for GA soon? There are some overlinking in the lead and also half of the non-essential cast can be taken out. I will probably get back to cleaning everything soon, please let me know what you think? ☯ Jag uar ☯ 15:17, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
You still planning to help me with articles relating to Cartoon Cartoons? It's been a while since you responded.-- Phil A. Fry ( talk) 18:08, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Jaguar! I'm not sure if you usually get involved with peer reviews, but your GA review of Irataba was very helpful, so I wanted to invite you to comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Irataba/archive1. No worries if you're too busy or disinterested; I'll understand. Rationalobserver ( talk) 21:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jaguar,
Thank you again for taking on the Mind Meld good article nomination. I have submitted the article for featured status here. If you would be willing to contribute to the discussion, I would be grateful for any further constructive comments you might provide.
Neelix ( talk) 23:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyeditor's Barnstar |
For conducting a c/e on Mayabazar, making my job easy to go through its GA Review. Thank you! Pavanjandhyala ( talk) 01:46, 13 March 2015 (UTC) |
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |